Slashdot Mirror
Airline Passenger Walked Past Security With a Loaded Gun Magazine (apnews.com)
An airline passenger "passed a security checkpoint with a loaded gun magazine," reports the Associated Press, citing information from an airport duty manager:
Bob Rotiski said the passenger who apparently had visited a shooting range packed a loaded magazine in his carry-on bag. He said an officer identified the magazine during security screening, but the wrong bag was pulled from the line. By that time, the passenger had already left the checkpoint with the bag containing the magazine....
Security lines were closed and flights were temporarily grounded at a San Francisco International Airport terminal...for nearly an hour, and United Airline flights out of Terminal 3 were grounded Saturday morning as TSA officers looked for the passenger.
"Rotiski said the lines reopened after officers located the passenger and brought him back for re-screening."
Security lines were closed and flights were temporarily grounded at a San Francisco International Airport terminal...for nearly an hour, and United Airline flights out of Terminal 3 were grounded Saturday morning as TSA officers looked for the passenger.
"Rotiski said the lines reopened after officers located the passenger and brought him back for re-screening."
Ain't nothing more entertaining than the play that is security theater.
If your last sentence is true, I hereby opt out of "actual security".
"Rotiski said the lines reopened after officers located the passenger and brought him back for re-screening."
By which time he could have passed off anything else he was carrying to anyone else in the departure lounges who were already "past security" and they could have easily taken it onto a plane.
Well done guys.
I'm not surprised that this happened. I am surprised that they actually figured out who it was *before* he got on a plane. That level of competence is a little out of character for the TSA.
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
THEN and ONLY then will you ever have actual security.
Yes, but who is going to defend me from you?
I have my own gun, and I use it to defend myself from you. I shoot you, you shoot me. In the end, I'm still dead. Now, if neither of us had a gun in the first place, we would both still be alive.
The second amendment does not permit you to carry gun to defend yourself from violent crime. If that were the case, the best defense would be banning weapons altogether. The second amendment is there so that you can defend yourself against tyranny. The part you missed is that the defense of liberty must be paid with blood, and that invariably includes the blood of the defenders.
Put another way, you have the right to bear arms, only in so far as that right is exercised in defense of liberty, but there is no guarantee that the process wont kill you. A weapon can't protect life, only take it
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
I could have the wooden handle from a trench knife hidden in my sock.
You know how I can tell you are white?
I'll sure be glad when they finally catch all the terrorists & we can go back to normal.
Any day now.
1. They did identify the clip
2. But they searched the wrong bag.
WOuld you, as a hijacker, think that was a great way to smuggle in a gun? No. while (2) happened it's a low probability event. Not something you would count on.
Thus as a deterrent for overt attacks this is worked. Not saying the process can't somehow be subverted in some other way but this particular example is not a good one to point at and yell "security theater".
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
No one cares about a loaded magazine as there is no firearm.
So, literally, no one?
Security lines were closed and flights were temporarily grounded at a San Francisco International Airport terminal...for nearly an hour ...
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
It would easily fit in your underwear.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Reality: He would have gotten on the plane had a crappy meal, a fraction of a can of Coke(tm) and arrived at his destination. A disaster was not averted. 100's of lives were not saved. A government rule was enforced. Nothing more.
TSA headline: Our agent heroes saved you AGAIN! Countless lives saved and counting. btw. We demanddeserve another 10 billion in funding.
Now, if neither of us had a gun in the first place, we would both still be alive.
No. The larger, stronger person more skilled in hand to hand combat would be alive. Your statement ignores thousands of years of history which clearly identifies people killing each other before guns came along.
On top of all that, it's not a gun.
You're one of those people who believe that the preamble in the 2A makes the right limited and conditional.. Fortunately, you are dead wrong.
DEAD wrong.
The second amendment does not permit you to carry gun to defend yourself from violent crime.
DC v. Heller explicitly states that carrying a firearm for self-defense is a purpose of the 2nd Amendment; the Supreme Court held that 1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
You mean gun violence is very low? I totally agree.
how did they figure out who this passenger was? timestamps on video correlated to the ticket scan at the TSA agent at the start of the security line? sounds like TSA can monitor every passenger that passes through any airport at any time.
And you thought China was bad.
-dk
Are you in your home as mentioned in the 2008 Supreme Court Heller self-defence decision? If not, are you part of a well regulated militia?
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Try security camera aimed at the X-ray machine's output end; where people actually take their belongings back. Would be nice to know, in other situations, who the someone is that stole my laptop. In this situation, they know which bag they really wanted (an off by one error) and saw who took it.
I'm anti-guns but this must be some of the crappiest arguments I've heard. People get stabbed, bludgeoned, hacked and strangled to death without guns too. Your average "family tragedy" doesn't take anything more than kitchen knifes or a tool rack. Short of a very few protected individuals very few could survive an outright assassination attempt, even the celebrities with bodyguards aren't equipped like the Secret Service. And even they have problems if someone comes in guns blazing. The main arguments I have against it is:
a) Escalation: In Europe it's rare that a burglary/robbery ends up being an unplanned murder. I mean in that swatting case we saw a SWAT team in full gear shoot a guy lit up by a floodlight because one of the cops thought he might be reaching for something. What's the risk a lone cat burglar/mugger thinks you were reaching for a gun? Nobody outruns bullets. With knives it'll default towards getting the fuck out of there.
b) Amplification: We have killers but we rarely have killing sprees, people kill those they're extremely angry with but not everyone in sight. It actually takes effort to chase down and kill a victim, while with a gun it's easy to take as many people with you as possible, with very little time to escape.
c) Collateral: You often hear tragic cases of little kids and other bystanders hit by stray bullets and such, that just doesn't happen with melee weapons. Heck, sometimes it's not even the attacker's bullets it's those trying to defend themselves or the cops. It's just messed up for everybody.
d) Asymmetry: Western-style duels are pretty damn rare. If you have the time and chance to retreat you often have the time to lock the door, block the door and call 911. If you're already at gunpoint the gun on your hip doesn't do much good. They always get to pick the time and place and come prepared, you don't.
In 1786 I would have preferred my own gun too, it's not like they had a cell phone to call the police. The sheriff was somebody you could ride into town to tell about it hours after the fact, if you were still alive. Also they didn't exactly have much in the way of fingerprints and DNA, wear a mask and you were an anonymous bandit. The militia that was supposed to be all able-bodied men who kept their own guns, it pretty clear if you read the history they did not want the government to be able to disarm the population. But in the 18th century you'd be pretty crazy to think that's the only thing it was for.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
It's not even dangerous ffs. You could do more damage bludgeoning someone with an iphone.
Youâ(TM)re pretty naive if thatâ(TM)s news to you. I figure thatâ(TM)s the least of what theyâ(TM)re doing to track people.
While I agree completely in your assessment of the 2A; What makes you so sure that if neither of us, in a hypothetical fight, would both be alive? If you attack me I play for keeps. I gouge eyes, I can crush your trake with my index finger and middle finger, I shatter elbows, and if tour down I will stomp your cervical vertibrae with combat boots. The fight isnt over until I am certain the threat is neutralized. Which means your not getting up. A gurney or body bag, either will suffice. This is how Ive been trained for more than 30yrs. The nearest object becomes a weapon. I can generate enough snapping force from the end of a child size aluminum bat to shatter a skull with one strike to the temple. Why does everyone think nobody ever killed eachother before firearms came around? Never put all your eggs in one basket. This includes personal defense.
Would poison gas pass as an arm as it is illegal in a militia setting unlike most weapons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Ah, nothing more free than enforced politeness at the point of gun.
Much better than having to pay taxes, which libertarian tossers like you keep telling us is also a form of violence.
Nice to see libertarians showing their true colours once again - you only care that you get to exercise a freedom to intimidate other people. Politeness backed by threat of death. So FREE!
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
But but but you don't get to pretend to be a hero going down with an awesome soundtrack when they play your story in the theatre!
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
We know you are white because you called the US justice system "generally trustworthy". The only time the US justice system is generally trustworthy is if you are white, and appear to be above the poverty line. Also helps if you look like you might be well connected.
Yes, but who is going to defend me from you?
I have my own gun, and I use it to defend myself from you. I shoot you, you shoot me. In the end, I'm still dead. Now, if neither of us had a gun in the first place, we would both still be alive.
No. You would be dead by a knife on your belly, as the assassin would be pretty sure you are defenseless, and he would walk away from it easily.
Guns are no a life insurance. Guns are deterrences. And on your example, you take the bastard with you - one less criminal walking on the streets.
But this doesn't concerns you, as all you are worried about is on your own survival, with complete disregard of anyone else, right?
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
The first two sentences were from the parent post. Somehow, the quoting failed on me here.
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
When I was going to build a primitive gun, I did a muzzleloader. I made my black powder from scratch, starting with wood.
You know how I can tell you are a dumb fucking woketard?
The main finding ot Heller was that the 2A describes an "individual right", not some kind of state-sponsored organizational right. The framers specifically said that the only individuals who might be excluded were "some Government officials". It's easy to go back and read what the intentions and meanings of the words were in their historical context. Including "shall not be infringed". Gun control is purely a modern invention, and most gun control rhetoric is simply nonsense.
Would poison gas pass as an arm as it is illegal in a militia setting unlike most weapons.
Not sure where you get this "militia setting" idea; are you referring to the fact
that international "law" has banned poison gas? In general, the idea of the
2A was that the individuals should have the same capability as the army,
because that's who they might have to fight in the next revolution.
(And of course the usual deterrent effect is in play here.)
They had weapons at the time that might surprise you, including high
rate of fire guns, and of course they had cannons and so forth.
In any event is the principle of keeping up with the army.
They didn't have nuclear weapons, but those aren't commonly
thought of as "arms". The scale of effect that is intended by the
2A rights is that of soldier versus citizen. An "arm" is something
that can be wielded by a man or a group of men against each other.
So, generally any kind of projectile weaponry that is aimed at individuals.
Poison gas, nuclear weapons, biological or radiological devices,
are not usually considered "arms" under this concept.
Whether a state government should have things like nuclear weapons
is less a question of scale, and more a question of whether you think
New York is going to nuke Kentucky to prevent succession.
(The answer is "No" for a variety of reasons.)
It is easy to go back and read all about wha they were thinking.
You don't have to take my or any else's word for it.
Yes, I'm referring to poison gas being banned in international law (treaty) and that the preamble was to make it clear that the 2nd was as much about the militia as the usual reasons to bear arms (Bill of Rights of 1689 only gave the right to bear arms for self defence), which leads to the idea that the arms allowed are similar to the standing armies arms. A wide category but not unlimited.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Back in 2006 when we still had the color coded threat levels, I flew from PHX to LAS and back to PHX during a red/severe period. Because it was a quick day trip I only had a carry on bag and that bag happened to be a backpack I had used the week before to go shooting. In that bag was a full 19 round magazine of 9mm FMJ that I had stuffed into a side pocket and forgotten to remove before the trip. I made it through 2 different airport security lines and xray machines without it being noticed or stopped. I didn't even notice I had left it in there myself until I got home and unpacked. However they damn sure got the bottle of contact lens cleaner I had in the same bag.
To misquote Churchill, never has an operating system (FreeBSD) used by so many been administered by so few. - NetCraft
define "free state".
Also, Weapons protect life all the time.
So that large criminals can freely intimidate the smaller members of society. got it.